Roadmap for the next decade of plant programmed cell death research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Programmed cell death (PCD) is fundamentally important for plant development, abiotic stress responses and immunity, but our understanding of its regulation remains fragmented. Building a stronger research community is required to accelerate progress in this area through knowledge exchange and constructive debate. In this Viewpoint, we aim to initiate a collective effort to integrate data across a diverse set of experimental models to facilitate characterisation of the fundamental mechanisms underlying plant PCD and ultimately aid the development of a new plant cell death classification system in the future. We also put forward our vision for the next decade of plant PCD research stemming from discussions held during the 31 st New Phytologist workshop, ‘The Life and Death Decisions of Plant Cells’ that took place at University College Dublin in Ireland (14–15 June 2023). We convey the key areas of significant progress and possible future research directions identified, including resolving the spatiotemporal control of cell death, isolation of its molecular and genetic regulators, and harnessing technical advances for studying PCD events in plants. Further, we review the breadth of potential impacts of plant PCD research and highlight the promising new applications of findings from this dynamically evolving field.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".